Sony lens’ question

IamBrad said:

Hi

i have a long history of photography and filmmaking, but it’s all mostly pre digital

I’ve not made a final body choice yet, but 90% sure it will be a Sony full frame like the 7iii or 7riii

probably going used on body and lens. As I’m searching options, I have a couple questions

if the lens states e mount compatible, for e mount, etc., is it safe to assume auto focus and aperture control will work properly?

besides Sony, what are good 3rd party options. Seems Tamron has been around since when I was doing film, but not sure about their quality

What brands should I avoid?

thanks in advance

Click to expand...

Sigma, Tamron, Samyang/Rokinon for E mount (FF) are all good. I have no experience with other brands.

IamBrad said:

Seems Tamron has been around since when I was doing film, but not sure about their quality

Click to expand...

Tamron is partially owned by Sony and their lenses for Sony are very good.

My Tamron 28-200 is my walk-around lens for my a7R3.

you can get some steal deals with Samyang/Rokinon lenses. Just make sure they're the updated autofocus series (F1.8 or F1.4 versions)... I think I got my 35mm F1.8 for like $150 and 18mm F2.8 for like $90...both are fantastic.

There are some limitations on certain aftermarket lenses such as frames per second and there could be auto focus speed issues with non Sony lenses. The best thing is to ask on the forum here when you have your short list of what lenses you are buying, chances are there will be 20 or so people with the same Body and Lens combo to get some real feedback pre-purchase.

I have all Sigma primes and they are very nice and fast but they are like twice the weight of the Sony GM primes but half the cost.

Also if you use an editor such as Lightroom there are profiles for corrections for most of the common lenses, which help with aberrations and distortion. So for some people the post process side is important in lens selection.

I have lenses from Sigma and Viltrox, both work perfectly on my a7Rv. My best guess is Samyang, Tamron and Tokina lenses also work perfectly fine on E-mount cameras. If you have a FF camera, just make sure you are getting a FF lens, different manufacturers use different product codes to differentiate FF from crop lenses.

There are other manufacturers that make lenses that will properly attach to an E-mount camera, but have no AF or electrical connections. Usually they list "manual focus" as a feature. I have lenses from TT Artisans and 7 Artisans like that— they work as expected.

Voigtlander make s variety of lenses for E mount. I like the APO Lanthar range, but that's not all they do.

And one of the coolest parts? There are absolutely no auto-focus issues with Voigtlander lenses. That's because they are manual focus lenses.

There are APS E-Mount lenses and Full Frame (35mm) E-Mount lenses often referred to as FE (FullFrame E-Mount) lenses. An APS lens will fit on a Full Frame body and you can take pictures with it but only the inner portion of the sensor will be used so you get a lower resolution photo which appears to be more telephoto than a FE lens of the same focal length.

Third party manufactures (Like Rokinon) make manual focus E-Mount lenses that will not transfer aperture or focal length information to the camera so this information will not be recorded with the photo. All of the Tamron and Sigma lenses I know of are Auto Focus and work VERY well with Sony bodies. I consider both Sigma and Tamron to be top end lens manufactures and pretty equal. There are some newer comers to third party lenses like Rokinon that make some great lenses that are excellent values and they are now making some excellent auto focus lenses as well as their manual focus lenses.

In film photography large apertures were valued for letting in more light allowing higher shutter speeds. In digital photography the more light isn't near the deal it was with film and large apertures are valued for their shallow depth of field to blur backgrounds and foregrounds to highlight the subject. I.e. A good F/4 lens can take great photographs but the shallow DOF is limited. With the variable ISO capabilities of digital sensors I don't find the nearly need for large apertures that I did in my film days.

The majority of film lenses were hand calculated. With the advent of computer lens design software the quality of lens image rendering is far ahead of the best film lenses. The complex optics of zoom lenses are much easier to figure with lens design software allowing manufactures to really minimize the trade offs with multi-focal length (zoom) lenses.

I would recommend looking at a used Sony 24-105/F4 lens as a good starting place. It is an excellent Full Frame E-mount lens and is usually a bargain at used photo gear retailers (MPB, KEH, Adorama, etc.)

If you can stretch your budget to a used A7RIV I think you would be very pleased with it. Other than the higher resolution sensor it is a faster more responsive camera than the A7RIII. But the A7RIII is no slouch.

thermalguy said:

Also if you use an editor such as Lightroom there are profiles for corrections for most of the common lenses, which help with aberrations and distortion. So for some people the post process side is important in lens selection.

Click to expand...

‘I’m learning Lightroom now, can you give a little more on this subject please ?

thanks

The e mount with aps-c designation, that crossed my mind after my OP, so thanks for mentioning

MikeInOr said:

In film photography large apertures were valued for letting in more light allowing higher shutter speeds. In digital photography the more light isn't near the deal it was with film and large apertures are valued for their shallow depth of field to blur backgrounds and foregrounds to highlight the subject. I.e. A good F/4 lens can take great photographs but the shallow DOF is limited. With the variable ISO capabilities of digital sensors I don't find the nearly need for large apertures that I did in my film days.

Click to expand...

thanks for everything in your reply

(I feel like the rip van winkle of photography- I’ve paid so little attention to the last 30 years, now I look around and everything is different)

this in particular stood out though. For sure coming from my old school perspective on things, I’ve found I’m always looking at the lenses with sub f4 specs - and their price jumps big time

When using a slower lens, is it just standard practice to fix it in post if you want a shallower DOF? Or are people using the zoom to help shallow it out?

thanks

IamBrad said:

thermalguy said:

Also if you use an editor such as Lightroom there are profiles for corrections for most of the common lenses, which help with aberrations and distortion. So for some people the post process side is important in lens selection.

Click to expand...

‘I’m learning Lightroom now, can you give a little more on this subject please ?

thanks

Click to expand...

The best thing is to watch a you tube video on Lens Correction in Lightroom as it is too much to write. The most common use and easiest way to understand it would be if you shoot a wide angle and stuff that is straight like walls or the horizon gets bent on the edges. This feature will correct that automatically if you have your correct lens profiles in the program, Lightroom already has the most common lenses and camera profiles in there when you install the software.

For myself I used to use photoshop 10 years ago for all editing and now mostly lightroom and jump into Photoshop only for the big stuff. With so many features and how good it all works I do not even shoot RAW, I find that I can get 95% out of JPEGs and save all the space on my drive. I'm not pro enough to justify that extra 5% net gain with the RAW.

IamBrad said:

thermalguy said:

Also if you use an editor such as Lightroom there are profiles for corrections for most of the common lenses, which help with aberrations and distortion. So for some people the post process side is important in lens selection.

Click to expand...

‘I’m learning Lightroom now, can you give a little more on this subject please ?

thanks

Click to expand...

E mount has embedded lens corrections. Some processors (like Lightroom and PhotoLab) use their own corrections. Some processors (like Capture One) use the embedded ones by default. That means you don’t have to wait for a profile when a new lens comes to market.

3rd party lenses have burst speed limits on the stacked sensor bodies (A9nn and A1). Only Sony lenses can use teleconverters on E mount. Some Sony lenses (a limited list) do full Dual IS, some Sony and third party lenses do partial Dual IS.

Be very careful buying earlier Sony lenses. Many of them are not that good. The later G lenses and GM mk ii zooms are exceptional, as are the later GM primes. Tamron have some great FE lenses, like the 28-75/2.8 G2. Sigma lenses are pretty good too. The Voigtlaender primes are a bit mixed but have a classic look.

If you are adapting lenses (typically older manual primes) you need to watch out for sensor stack thickness mismatches. My impression is that this is mainly with UWA lenses like M mount Voigts.

Modern UWA zooms can have heroic software distortion corrections at the wide end. The Sony 20-70/4 is the poster child for this. While this is mostly invisible when using it, it can have consequences to be aware of.

I’ve found this the most useful website https://phillipreeve.net/blog/fe-lenses-sony-comprehensive-independent-guide/

My main use is landscape, so you may find them less useful.

I’ve had bad experiences with Samyang and I’m not the only one. They do offer good quality at a low price if you are prepared to keep testing and returning until you get a good one, maybe the first, second, …

I’m afraid the bad news is that there is an enormous choice of FE lenses from multiple vendors at many price, weight and performance points. One poster’s ideal lens is another’s idea of a mistake.

Over the last 2-3 years, Sony have positioned themselves as offering exceptional lenses with big shooting envelopes at low weight (for their shooting envelope) and premium prices. There are outliers like the 200-600 G, and indeed several G lenses have great IQ at reasonable prices. I held the 70-200/4 G mk ii OSS macro and was amazed at the size and weight for the capability.

At least you get different views to sort through when you ask here.

Andrew

IamBrad said:

MikeInOr said:

In film photography large apertures were valued for letting in more light allowing higher shutter speeds. In digital photography the more light isn't near the deal it was with film and large apertures are valued for their shallow depth of field to blur backgrounds and foregrounds to highlight the subject. I.e. A good F/4 lens can take great photographs but the shallow DOF is limited. With the variable ISO capabilities of digital sensors I don't find the nearly need for large apertures that I did in my film days.

Click to expand...

thanks for everything in your reply

(I feel like the rip van winkle of photography- I’ve paid so little attention to the last 30 years, now I look around and everything is different)

this in particular stood out though. For sure coming from my old school perspective on things, I’ve found I’m always looking at the lenses with sub f4 specs - and their price jumps big time

When using a slower lens, is it just standard practice to fix it in post if you want a shallower DOF? Or are people using the zoom to help shallow it out?

thanks

Click to expand...

No, not for me. I use a Rokinon manual focus 85mm F/1.4 lens and a Sony AF 100mm F/2.8 STF (smooth transitional focus) lens for portraits when I want to really pop a subject out of the background. The Rokinon gives me excellent results from a VERY affordable MF lens (They have since come out with an affordable AF 85/1.4)! I picked up a used Sony 100mm STF lens about a year ago which does something very special with the bokeh that a single aperture lens (or software) can't match. (STF lenses use 2 apertures, one in front of the other and spaced apart for a unique bokeh experience) For me this is the difference between a real photograph and something that has been generated with effects on a cell phone. To me the look is very different (when viewed on a large screen).

I also picked up a used LensBaby swirl 60 (Petzval formula) manual focus lens when I occasionally want a unique swirling bokeh background. Another effect that can be done in software but looks VERY phony to me when done in software.

Through my teenage daughter I have taken up shooting Senior photos for kids at her high school (pro-bono). This is when I use my portrait lens collection a lot. I usually shoot in a make shift home studio with off camera flashes and at some select scenic spots outdoors.

For general street and travel photography I find the Sony 24-105/4 zoom gives me enough depth of field subject isolation that I don't feel the need to carry a separate portrait lens if portraiture is not the main purpose for the outing. The 24-105/4 is a rather big and kind of heavy lens. Going to a F/2.8 zoom lens makes for an even bigger, even heavier lens. More than I want to carry around. The biggest change with digital is I no longer worry about a large aperture lens to get enough light in for good exposure at fast shutter speeds. Modern digital camera sensors have freed me from any worry about having enough light, it is just no longer a concern for me.

My usual carry around kit is: A7RIV, Sony 24-105/4 and 12-24/4. With 61mp I have a LOT of pixels to crop. If I want a more telephoto shot than 105mm I just crop in post. If I were to buy a NEW kit today I would give serious consideration to basing it around the new Sony 20-70/4 lens and add an ultrawide prime to it. But my current kit works so well switching to a 20-70 zoom won't happen any time soon and most likely never.

I spent decades shooting film and the 24-70/2.8 lens was a must. I have found with digital I am very happy with F/4 zooms without the price and, mainly, the weight penalty. Adding a F/1.8 or F/1.4 prime lens with good bokeh for portraits is very affordable with third party lenses.

I will also mention output format has a big effect on gear choice. When viewed on a laptop or, especially, a cell phone screen software manipulated photos hold up very well. When viewing 8x10 or larger prints is when the software manipulation really falls apart for me. If you are only posting photos on the web software manipulation is fine... and there is really no need for a full frame camera IMHO.

IamBrad said:

I’ve not made a final body choice yet, but 90% sure it will be a Sony full frame like the 7iii or 7riii

probably going used on body and lens. As I’m searching options, I have a couple questions

if the lens states e mount compatible, for e mount, etc., is it safe to assume auto focus and aperture control will work properly?

Click to expand...

There are lots of E-mount lenses that don't autofocus at all; they're not designed to autofocus. If you need or want autofocus, be sure the lens specifies that. Otherwise, yes.

For aperture control, mostly yes, but AFAIK there may be a few old-school lenses where the camera cannot control the aperture, and your only option may be to manually set in on the lens.

As already mentioned, more than a few lenses are APS-C only, and will work on a FF body, but with the sensor cropped and/or vignetting.

IamBrad said:

besides Sony, what are good 3rd party options. Seems Tamron has been around since when I was doing film, but not sure about their quality

Click to expand...

Tamron (being partially owned by Sony) is a very safe choice, Sigma is a safe choice, and both produce some very good quality lenses. Mostly I would not hesitate to buy a Samyang / Rokinon; just be aware that more than a few of its lenses are manual-focus only. By reputation Viltrox seems mostly good. After that it's more of an 'it depends' and/or price-versus-performance situation. I bought a Meike autofocus 50mm f/1.8 for $150; so far it seems like a good lens for the price. Lots of folks are happy with various TTArtisans, 7Artisans, and other brands. The E-mount ecosystem is huge, and requirements and opinions vary.

IamBrad said:

What brands should I avoid?

Click to expand...

My general and quick take is that if B&H sells it and they report at least five user reviews with an average of at least 4 out of 5, it's probably not something you should avoid, unless multiple users report premature failures (e.g. the Samyang 24-70mm f/2.8). Obviously what's a reasonable expectation for a Yongnuo lens differs substantially from what's a reasonable expectation for a Zeiss or Sony lens.

IamBrad said:

thermalguy said:

Also if you use an editor such as Lightroom there are profiles for corrections for most of the common lenses, which help with aberrations and distortion. So for some people the post process side is important in lens selection.

Click to expand...

‘I’m learning Lightroom now, can you give a little more on this subject please ?

thanks

Click to expand...

Vignetting (light fall off around the peripherals of a lens), color fringing and distortion (field curvature) are constant for a lens at a particular focal length and aperture. Since they are constant applying an electronic filter can easily cancel all of these lens abbreviations.

Sony cameras have lens profiles built into the bodies that are applied to JPG images that cancel out these lens abbreviations. RAW files are the images without any in camera manipulations of the images so these lens profiles are not applied to RAW files in the camera. To cancel out the abbreviations in RAW files software (like lightroom) also have lens profiles to cancel them out when editing RAW files.

Camera body firmware updates are often issued after new lenses are released to add the new lens profiles to the camera body. Software, like lightroom, will also be updated to include new lens profiles when new lenses are released.

Lens abbreviations that used to be the bane of film photographers are no longer really an issue with digital.

Pointed me in the right direction, that’s what I needed, thanks

Great info, thank you

Fantastic , thanks Mike

NAwlins Contrarian said:

NAwlins Contrarian said:

I’ve not made a final body choice yet, but 90% sure it will be a Sony full frame like the 7iii or 7riii

probably going used on body and lens. As I’m searching options, I have a couple questions

if the lens states e mount compatible, for e mount, etc., is it safe to assume auto focus and aperture control will work properly?

Click to expand...

There are lots of E-mount lenses that don't autofocus at all; they're not designed to autofocus. If you need or want autofocus, be sure the lens specifies that. Otherwise, yes.

For aperture control, mostly yes, but AFAIK there may be a few old-school lenses where the camera cannot control the aperture, and your only option may be to manually set in on the lens.

As already mentioned, more than a few lenses are APS-C only, and will work on a FF body, but with the sensor cropped and/or vignetting.

NAwlins Contrarian said:

besides Sony, what are good 3rd party options. Seems Tamron has been around since when I was doing film, but not sure about their quality

Click to expand...

Tamron (being partially owned by Sony) is a very safe choice, Sigma is a safe choice, and both produce some very good quality lenses. Mostly I would not hesitate to buy a Samyang / Rokinon; just be aware that more than a few of its lenses are manual-focus only. By reputation Viltrox seems mostly good. After that it's more of an 'it depends' and/or price-versus-performance situation. I bought a Meike autofocus 50mm f/1.8 for $150; so far it seems like a good lens for the price. Lots of folks are happy with various TTArtisans, 7Artisans, and other brands. The E-mount ecosystem is huge, and requirements and opinions vary.

NAwlins Contrarian said:

What brands should I avoid?

Click to expand...

My general and quick take is that if B&H sells it and they report at least five user reviews with an average of at least 4 out of 5, it's probably not something you should avoid, unless multiple users report premature failures (e.g. the Samyang 24-70mm f/2.8). Obviously what's a reasonable expectation for a Yongnuo lens differs substantially from what's a reasonable expectation for a Zeiss or Sony lens.

Click to expand...

My daughter and friend playing around with my $79 (used) Opteka MF 6.5mm F/2 fisheye APS lens on my A7RIV:

View attachment 3494904

Manual focus and manual aperture.

We are in the golden age of affordable high quality third party lenses!

My (used) TTArtisans 11m F/2.8 manual focus manual aperture fisheye lens wasn't nearly as much fun:

View attachment 3494907



Decent bokeh from my 24-105/4 at 105 F/5:



View attachment 6b8060bb99004935b7ab459b76467b4b.jpg